RESUMOObjetivo: comparar as dimensões do palato duro em diferentes tipologias faciais de crianças respiradoras nasais e orais. Método: a amostra foi constituída por 54 crianças, na faixa etária entre sete e 11 anos, distribuídas em grupos conforme o tipo facial e o modo respiratório. O tipo facial foi obtido por meio da análise cefalométrica de Ricketts, e o modo respiratório foi determinado a partir da avaliação fonoaudiológica e do diagnóstico otorrinolaringológico. Para realização de medidas transversais, verticais e do comprimento anteroposterior do palato duro, foram obtidos modelos em gesso do arco dental maxilar. Para comparação das dimensões do palato duro entre os grupos, foram utilizados testes paramétricos e não paramétricos, ao nível de significância de 5%. Resultados: não foi verificada diferença estatisticamente significante nas medidas do palato duro entre as crianças braquifaciais, mesofaciais e dolicofaciais. Verificou-se diferença estatisticamente significante na distância entre os segundos pré-molares nos diferentes tipos faciais das crianças respiradoras nasais e orais, sendo que esta diferença não foi detectada nas comparações múltiplas. Conclusão: as dimensões do palato duro não diferiram quando analisadas em diferentes tipos faciais independente do modo respiratório. Porém, evidenciou-se diferença na distância entre os segundos pré-molares quando o tipo facial foi analisado nos respiradores nasais e orais.

Introduction Mouth breathing can affect the functions of the respiratory systems and quality of life. For this reason, children who grow up with this stimulus may have implications on physical and psychological aspects at adult age.Objective To evaluate childhood mouth-breathing consequences for the ventilatory function and quality of life at adult age.Materials and methods Prospective, observational and cross-sectional study with 24 adults, between 18 and 30 years old, mouth breathers during childhood, comprised the childhood mouth-breathing group (CMB). The childhood nasal-breathing (CNB) group was composed of 20 adults of the same age, without history of respiratory disease during all their lives. Measurements of maximal respiratory pressures, peak expiratory flow and 6-minute walk test were assessed. In addition, all the volunteers answered the Short Form-36 questionnaire (SF-36).Results The maximal inspiratory (p = 0.001) and expiratory (p = 0.000) pressures as well as the distance in the walk test (p = 0.003) were lower in the COB. The COB also presented lower score in the General Health domain of the SF-36 Questionnaire (p = 0.002).Conclusion Childhood mouth-breathing yields consequences for the ventilatory function at adult age, with lower respiratory muscle strength and functional exercise capacity. Conversely, the quality of life was little affected by the mouth breathing in this study.

Mouth breathers showed narrower hard palate at the level of second premolars and first molars, and deeper palate in the level of second premolars, when compared to nasal breathers. It is evidenced that habitual mouth breathers presented deeper hard palate at the level of canines, when compared to mouth breathers from obstructive etiology.

Nasal patency was lower in children with restless sleep, rhinitis signs and symptoms, hard palate width reduced and with changes in mastication, deglutition and speech functions. It is also emphasized that most of the children presented signs and symptom of allergic rhinitis.

Purpose: to study the usual tongue and lips position in anteroposterior and vertical growth patterns in children with mixed dentition. Methods: the sample comprised 54 children, aged seven to 11 years old. The selected children were referred for radiographic evaluation and cephalometric analysis, which made it possible to obtain the SNA, SNB and AND angles (anteroposterior growth pattern) and the classification of the facial type: brachyfacial, mesofacial and dilocofacial (vertical growth pattern). The tongue and lips position was determined from the observation of cephalometric radiographs made by two speech therapists experienced in orofacial motricity. The usual tongue position was classified as in the papilla, high dorsum or on the floor of the mouth, and the usual lips position, as closed or half-open/open. In order to verify the relationship between the usual tongue and lips position with anteroposterior and vertical growth patterns, statistical tests like Analysis of variance, Student's t test, Mann-Whitney U and chi-square test at a significance level of 5% was used. Results: a statistically significant relationship between the tongue position and the SNB angle was identified, children with tongue position on the floor of the mouth showed significantly lower SNB angle than children with tongue position in the papilla. SNB angle was a statistically significant lower in children with open or half open lips than children with closed lips. There was no difference between the normal position of the tongue and lips in other growth patterns anteroposterior and vertical growth. Conclusion: The usual position of lips and tongue were related to mandibular growth pattern and hasn't been influenced by facial type.